Re: [RBW] Re: Silver crankset, used, 178, 44-34-24

[Toshi Takeuchi]

Hi Steven, if the cranks are not sold yet, then can you tell me the crank
arm length?

Thanks,
Toshi


On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 6:39 PM Steven Sweedler  wrote:

> Price lowered to $100.  shipped CONUS
>
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 1:58 PM Steven Sweedler 
> wrote:
>
>> I bought this used and decided I needed the 20 T on the 94-58 XT cranks
>> that I have been using. Please look at the pictures closely, I filed off
>> the slightest bit of the non driveside arm to see if it would clear the
>> chainstay, and quit before it did. There are also some scratches on the
>> inside of the driveside arm. Also included is a new Blackspire ring, 42 T,
>> and a used TA Zephyr 36T, both 110 bcd. $125 shipped. Thanks, Steve
>> --
>> Steven Sweedler
>> Plymouth, New Hampshire
>>
> --
> Steven Sweedler
> Plymouth, New Hampshire
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CALimyf%2BatsUyL4w5KJPm2H4Mwx9xR3oTb2kBF%2BdiqjLgBnrq6w%40mail.gmail.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CAGB59xzOfeU3RrUojfbgU61MtQr6rSvdXy2gTNg5fqSNu0sNsQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[RBW] Re: Silver crankset, used, 178, 44-34-24

[Steven Sweedler]

Price lowered to $100.  shipped CONUS

On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 1:58 PM Steven Sweedler  wrote:

> I bought this used and decided I needed the 20 T on the 94-58 XT cranks
> that I have been using. Please look at the pictures closely, I filed off
> the slightest bit of the non driveside arm to see if it would clear the
> chainstay, and quit before it did. There are also some scratches on the
> inside of the driveside arm. Also included is a new Blackspire ring, 42 T,
> and a used TA Zephyr 36T, both 110 bcd. $125 shipped. Thanks, Steve
> --
> Steven Sweedler
> Plymouth, New Hampshire
>
-- 
Steven Sweedler
Plymouth, New Hampshire

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CALimyf%2BatsUyL4w5KJPm2H4Mwx9xR3oTb2kBF%2BdiqjLgBnrq6w%40mail.gmail.com.

[RBW] Re: silver crankset questions

[aeroperf]

Thomas:  It sounds like I did exactly what you are thinking.
My Sam came with 26/40 rings on a Sugino XD-2.  After two years the 40 felt 
like it was not enough gear, so I tried both a 42 and a 44.

They did not exceed the "protection" of the guard.
The 42 did shift reliably.  The 44 felt like it was too big a step from the 
26 and I had to be a little more careful.
These were with the stock Shimano Claris 2-speed front derailleur.

This still was not what I felt I really wanted, so after another year I 
converted to a 3-speed - 26/36/46.  To do this I had to remove the guard.
I fitted a Shimano Sora FD3030 front derailleur.  This set-up feels exactly 
right for me.
However, it has only been 800 miles with this set-up, and I have thrown the 
chain to the outside twice.  It is "adjustment critical".

So ride it, swap chainrings, ride it some more.  Chainrings are relatively 
cheap, and you'll know it is right when you find what you want.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: silver crankset questions

[Joe Bernard]

Yep, 38/24 with 11/34 cassette. 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: silver crankset questions

[Thomas Lynn Skean]

Hi, Joe.

Is that the stock 38/24 setup?

Yours,
Thomas Lynn Skean

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: silver crankset questions

[Brewster Fong]

This is interesting. Last Saturday, I caught up with a rider on a climb out 
of Muir Beach and he was riding one of the latest carbon wonder bikes - a 
3T.  Yes, the same company that makes those stems and handlebars now makes 
framesets!  Apparently, 3T thing is to offer a 1x drivetrain. They claim 
you can save something like 400 grams over a normal double drivetrain. 
Whatever.

When I caught up with the guy, I asked him about using the 1x drivetrain on 
the road. I know it is becoming the big deal off-road, but I hear/read 
people blast it for road riding. This guy said he loved it!  He had a 42t 
chainring and a 10x42 11 speed rear cassette. He told me that although he 
was out of shape, when he gets "in-shape" he's going to swap the 42t out 
for a 46t?!  Yow, 46x10 high gear?!  Since I was on my Trek Madone with 
etap, I'm wondering if he said that to show me that he's not a "poser..."  
Lol!  

Personally, whatever works for you is what's right. A lot of my friends 
have switched not only to a "compact" crankset 50/34, but have also gone to 
an 11-32 11 speed cassette in the rear. So much for being "racers!"

Good Luck!  



On Monday, August 20, 2018 at 4:10:42 PM UTC-7, Benz, Sunnyvale, CA wrote:
>
> The guard sold with the Silver Wide/Low crank should support up to a 40T 
> chainring. Even with a 40T big ring, the jump to/from a 24T small ring is 
> still 16T, which is usually the recommended max spread (e.g., 50/34). 
>
> As for whether a 38T big ring is enough, you need to figure that for 
> yourself. You need to consider both the physical as well as the mental 
> aspects of this question. 
>
> For example, my 26” wheeled Atlantis has a 40x12 tall gear, and I spin out 
> easily on the local hilly terrain. I’ve thought about changing it out for a 
> bigger gear, but I’ve since learned to coast contentedly, meaning I learned 
> to let go of trying to be the “Fastest possible downhill”, at least on my 
> Atlantis. 
>
> It’s also funny going to my Atlantis from my other higher geared bikes, 
> because I feel like Superman spinning up its biggest gear. Of course I’m 
> going significant slower but it’s still nice to feel the downtube shifter 
> clunk into the highest gear on the flats.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: silver crankset questions

[dougP]

Thomas:

What cassette are you using? Tire size?  Are you in flat or hilly country?  
Lots of things to consider as they all interact.  

Your skill & standards come into play on "shifting reliably".  Think about 
the 34/50 compact doubles that are so common.  Some riders shift these 
effortlessly while others commonly drop the chain.  I would think paying a 
reasonable amount of attention when shifting (i.e.: don't "shift without 
lift") would make a 24/40 doable. 

dougP

On Monday, August 20, 2018 at 3:19:12 PM UTC-7, Thomas Lynn Skean wrote:
>
> Hi, all. 
>
> I’m getting a Silver 38/24 Wide/low double. I’m uncertain if the 38 will 
> be enough gear for me forever, so I’m wondering what my options are if 
> proves problematic at some point. (It won’t be a problem right away, but it 
> might become a problem if I get into better shape and decide to go faster 
> than I currently do.) 
>
> Has anyone tried replacing the 38 with a 39 or 40? If so, 
>
> Did it exceed the “protection” of the guard? 
>
> Did it shift reliably with the 24? 
>
> (I’m presuming either a 39 or a 40 would shift reliably with a 26.) 
>
> What derailer are you using? 
>
> Any experiences using a Silver Wide/low double with  an alpina-d triple 
> derailer or with a Shimano CX70 double would be greatly appreciated. 
>
> Yours, 
> Thomas Lynn Skean 
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Michael Hechmer]

Sorry to be joining this conversation so late, but for some reason I woke 
up this morning thinking about cranks and looked this thread up.

I certainly concur with those who write that low Q isn't for everyone, and 
I'm not sure why anyone would assert that, especially in the land of high 
end custom bike world.
My Ram has the White VBC with 150 Q; the tandem and Saluki both have the 
DaVinci crank with 158; and the Trek has the Sugino which RBW list as 
161-165.  As far as it goes, I can't tell the difference, unless I really 
focus on it, but even that may be in my immagination.

I have TA rings on the tandem and they work great, so I'd really like to 
have a TA crank, but crank, rings, and BB come to $700.  Too rich for my 
wallet.  I hope RBW does come out with a Silver branded crank.   My vote 
would be one like the DaVinci.  Made by White, separate spiders, so could 
be 110 or 94, nice looking in silver or black.  If co-branded, RBW could 
probably sell enough to get the price well below the current $220, with 
Silver rings, maybe $275.  Neither cheap nor crazy expensive as cranks go.

The Trek may well get a new crank next Spring.  Another option would be 
great.

Michael

On Thursday, September 25, 2014 7:29:04 AM UTC-4, Andrew Marchant-Shapiro 
wrote:

 W/r/t Q:

 My current crankset, a Sugino PX double on a 118 BB, feels significantly 
 narrower in terms of Q than my last few (last one on the same bike was an 
 Ultegra 6500-series road double on the standard spindle, I forget the size, 
 last other was a Sugino XD triple on a 113).  It's not really (far as I can 
 tell) more comfortable or less uncomfortable...it *does *make me feel 
 like I may need to *very* slightly raise my saddle from where it was with 
 the Ultegra, though that may be purely psychological.



 On Thursday, September 25, 2014 6:56:00 AM UTC-4, Chris Lampe 2 wrote:

 I've never measured the Q factor of the cranksets I've ridden but I do 
 know some are more comfortable than others.  As a very broad person with 
 wide hips and shoulders, I suspect those that have felt good tended to be 
 higher Q cranks.  Right now I'm running a modern 9-speed Deore crankset and 
 I find my right foot hanging half-way off the pedal.  Maybe I should figure 
 out the Q factor of that crankset and use that info if I ever purchase 
 another one. 



 On Monday, September 22, 2014 10:13:31 PM UTC-5, lungimsam wrote:

 In the new Blug post it mentions it may be coming.
 Very cool! Interested to see what it'll be like.
 Maybe they will have it all one bcd of such and such a diameter so's you 
 can remove all rings without having to take off the crank arms.
  That would be a cool and functional design for un-mechanics like me.

 BTW, who called RBW a simon pure labrick, and what is that?



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

['Chris Lampe 2' via RBW Owners Bunch]

I've never measured the Q factor of the cranksets I've ridden but I do know 
some are more comfortable than others.  As a very broad person with wide 
hips and shoulders, I suspect those that have felt good tended to be higher 
Q cranks.  Right now I'm running a modern 9-speed Deore crankset and I find 
my right foot hanging half-way off the pedal.  Maybe I should figure out 
the Q factor of that crankset and use that info if I ever purchase another 
one. 



On Monday, September 22, 2014 10:13:31 PM UTC-5, lungimsam wrote:

 In the new Blug post it mentions it may be coming.
 Very cool! Interested to see what it'll be like.
 Maybe they will have it all one bcd of such and such a diameter so's you 
 can remove all rings without having to take off the crank arms.
  That would be a cool and functional design for un-mechanics like me.

 BTW, who called RBW a simon pure labrick, and what is that?


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Andrew Marchant-Shapiro]

W/r/t Q:

My current crankset, a Sugino PX double on a 118 BB, feels significantly 
narrower in terms of Q than my last few (last one on the same bike was an 
Ultegra 6500-series road double on the standard spindle, I forget the size, 
last other was a Sugino XD triple on a 113).  It's not really (far as I can 
tell) more comfortable or less uncomfortable...it *does *make me feel like 
I may need to *very* slightly raise my saddle from where it was with the 
Ultegra, though that may be purely psychological.



On Thursday, September 25, 2014 6:56:00 AM UTC-4, Chris Lampe 2 wrote:

 I've never measured the Q factor of the cranksets I've ridden but I do 
 know some are more comfortable than others.  As a very broad person with 
 wide hips and shoulders, I suspect those that have felt good tended to be 
 higher Q cranks.  Right now I'm running a modern 9-speed Deore crankset and 
 I find my right foot hanging half-way off the pedal.  Maybe I should figure 
 out the Q factor of that crankset and use that info if I ever purchase 
 another one. 



 On Monday, September 22, 2014 10:13:31 PM UTC-5, lungimsam wrote:

 In the new Blug post it mentions it may be coming.
 Very cool! Interested to see what it'll be like.
 Maybe they will have it all one bcd of such and such a diameter so's you 
 can remove all rings without having to take off the crank arms.
  That would be a cool and functional design for un-mechanics like me.

 BTW, who called RBW a simon pure labrick, and what is that?



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Johan Larsson]

On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 2:04:10 AM UTC+2, Peter M wrote:

 I thought since some of the Rivendell models have bowed chainstays you 
 could only have so low of a q factor. Or I might be totally wrong too. 


The chainstays are of course setting the limit for the crank arms. But with 
chain rings mounting inwards on the crank you would be able to vary the 
chainline and Q-factor independently from each other with any chain ring 
combination. With such a crank as I would like to see you first choose a 
bottom bracket that gives the chainstay clearance you want on the bike in 
question (as tight as possible for most), then set the desired/correct 
chain line using spacers for the chain rings.

Johan Larsson,
Sweden


On Sep 23, 2014 7:20 PM, Johan Larsson seven@gmail.com javascript: 
 wrote:

 If I were to design a crankset I'd make it with chain ring bolts only 
 from the inside, like old SunTour XCM cranks but with a quite narrow gap 
 between the outer chain ring and crank arm. That way it's easy to run it as 
 a wide double (48/28 for example) with 110/74 or any choice of available 
 chain rings and still having a narrow Q-factor.

 It's too bad Grant seems to have given up on striving to keep the 
 Q-factor low. (?) As far as I can tell, you wouldn't lose anything with 
 such a crank, there would only be advantages. If you'd need a wider 
 ring-crank arm gap for some mtb style bike with wide tires and a wide cage 
 front shifter you can add spacers and run it with three rings. Or one. Or 
 four. If you have an old road bike you can keep it lean and narrow and run 
 it as a double with almost an unlimited choice of chain ring combinations 
 and a Q-factor in the 130 mm range, still using standard chain rings. This 
 winter I'm hoping to be able to make such a crank for myself, since I 
 finally have access to a lathe and having collected many old cranks I can 
 modify and take parts from.

 Johan Larsson,
 Sweden

 -- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
 RBW Owners Bunch group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
 email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com javascript:.
 To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com 
 javascript:.
 Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

  http://www.pinterest.com/pin/create/extension/

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Tim Gavin]

Johan-

I rode a super low-Q Stronglight 99 triple on my Riv Road for several
months.  It's a very lovely, very narrow crank set.  I got it (from a list
member) with standard extractor and pedal threading.

However, these old French cranks have very little distance between the big
ring and the crank arm (that's how they have such low Q factor), which
makes them difficult to shift properly.  I couldn't use any modern FD with
a sculpted outer plate or it would hit the crank arm.  I had decent luck
with a vintage Suntour Cyclone double FD, shifted friction with Silver
levers.  But with that setup it was still very reluctant to shift from the
small cog to the middle without going to the big ring first.

A triple FD would have a sculpted inner plate to lift the chain better than
the double FD, but I couldn't find any triple FDs, vintage or otherwise,
that don't also have a scuplted outer plate.

I recently swapped my Riv to drop bars and index shifting (8 speed Campy
Ergos) and I couldn't get any FD to work with that Stronglight crank.  I
ended up swapping the Campy Racing Triple crank back on, which shifts
perfectly with the IRD Alpina FD.

I'm just pointing out that low-Q cranks with little space between the big
ring and the crank arm do have some complications.  Whether those
complications become drawbacks depends on your priorities.  :)

With drops and Ergo shifters, my Riv is at least 17% faster.

And 47% of all statistics are fictional.  :)



 On Sep 23, 2014 7:20 PM, Johan Larsson seven@gmail.com wrote:

 If I were to design a crankset I'd make it with chain ring bolts only
 from the inside, like old SunTour XCM cranks but with a quite narrow gap
 between the outer chain ring and crank arm. That way it's easy to run it as
 a wide double (48/28 for example) with 110/74 or any choice of available
 chain rings and still having a narrow Q-factor.

 It's too bad Grant seems to have given up on striving to keep the
 Q-factor low. (?) As far as I can tell, you wouldn't lose anything with
 such a crank, there would only be advantages. If you'd need a wider
 ring-crank arm gap for some mtb style bike with wide tires and a wide cage
 front shifter you can add spacers and run it with three rings. Or one. Or
 four. If you have an old road bike you can keep it lean and narrow and run
 it as a double with almost an unlimited choice of chain ring combinations
 and a Q-factor in the 130 mm range, still using standard chain rings. This
 winter I'm hoping to be able to make such a crank for myself, since I
 finally have access to a lathe and having collected many old cranks I can
 modify and take parts from.

 Johan Larsson,
 Sweden

 --



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Goshen Peter]

But that's only true 75% of the time... :)

On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Tim Gavin tim.ga...@littlevillagemag.com
wrote:

 Johan-

 I rode a super low-Q Stronglight 99 triple on my Riv Road for several
 months.  It's a very lovely, very narrow crank set.  I got it (from a list
 member) with standard extractor and pedal threading.

 However, these old French cranks have very little distance between the big
 ring and the crank arm (that's how they have such low Q factor), which
 makes them difficult to shift properly.  I couldn't use any modern FD with
 a sculpted outer plate or it would hit the crank arm.  I had decent luck
 with a vintage Suntour Cyclone double FD, shifted friction with Silver
 levers.  But with that setup it was still very reluctant to shift from the
 small cog to the middle without going to the big ring first.

 A triple FD would have a sculpted inner plate to lift the chain better
 than the double FD, but I couldn't find any triple FDs, vintage or
 otherwise, that don't also have a scuplted outer plate.

 I recently swapped my Riv to drop bars and index shifting (8 speed Campy
 Ergos) and I couldn't get any FD to work with that Stronglight crank.  I
 ended up swapping the Campy Racing Triple crank back on, which shifts
 perfectly with the IRD Alpina FD.

 I'm just pointing out that low-Q cranks with little space between the big
 ring and the crank arm do have some complications.  Whether those
 complications become drawbacks depends on your priorities.  :)

 With drops and Ergo shifters, my Riv is at least 17% faster.

 And 47% of all statistics are fictional.  :)



 On Sep 23, 2014 7:20 PM, Johan Larsson seven@gmail.com wrote:

 If I were to design a crankset I'd make it with chain ring bolts only
 from the inside, like old SunTour XCM cranks but with a quite narrow gap
 between the outer chain ring and crank arm. That way it's easy to run it as
 a wide double (48/28 for example) with 110/74 or any choice of available
 chain rings and still having a narrow Q-factor.

 It's too bad Grant seems to have given up on striving to keep the
 Q-factor low. (?) As far as I can tell, you wouldn't lose anything with
 such a crank, there would only be advantages. If you'd need a wider
 ring-crank arm gap for some mtb style bike with wide tires and a wide cage
 front shifter you can add spacers and run it with three rings. Or one. Or
 four. If you have an old road bike you can keep it lean and narrow and run
 it as a double with almost an unlimited choice of chain ring combinations
 and a Q-factor in the 130 mm range, still using standard chain rings. This
 winter I'm hoping to be able to make such a crank for myself, since I
 finally have access to a lathe and having collected many old cranks I can
 modify and take parts from.

 Johan Larsson,
 Sweden

 --

  --
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
 RBW Owners Bunch group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
 email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
 To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
 Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[ted]

and whats the confidence interval ...

On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 6:54:30 AM UTC-7, Peter M wrote:

 But that's only true 75% of the time... :)

 On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Tim Gavin tim@littlevillagemag.com 
 javascript: wrote:

 Johan-

 I rode a super low-Q Stronglight 99 triple on my Riv Road for several 
 months.  It's a very lovely, very narrow crank set.  I got it (from a list 
 member) with standard extractor and pedal threading.

 However, these old French cranks have very little distance between the 
 big ring and the crank arm (that's how they have such low Q factor), which 
 makes them difficult to shift properly.  I couldn't use any modern FD with 
 a sculpted outer plate or it would hit the crank arm.  I had decent luck 
 with a vintage Suntour Cyclone double FD, shifted friction with Silver 
 levers.  But with that setup it was still very reluctant to shift from the 
 small cog to the middle without going to the big ring first.  

 A triple FD would have a sculpted inner plate to lift the chain better 
 than the double FD, but I couldn't find any triple FDs, vintage or 
 otherwise, that don't also have a scuplted outer plate.

 I recently swapped my Riv to drop bars and index shifting (8 speed Campy 
 Ergos) and I couldn't get any FD to work with that Stronglight crank.  I 
 ended up swapping the Campy Racing Triple crank back on, which shifts 
 perfectly with the IRD Alpina FD.  

 I'm just pointing out that low-Q cranks with little space between the big 
 ring and the crank arm do have some complications.  Whether those 
 complications become drawbacks depends on your priorities.  :)

 With drops and Ergo shifters, my Riv is at least 17% faster.

 And 47% of all statistics are fictional.  :)



 On Sep 23, 2014 7:20 PM, Johan Larsson seven@gmail.com wrote:

 If I were to design a crankset I'd make it with chain ring bolts only 
 from the inside, like old SunTour XCM cranks but with a quite narrow gap 
 between the outer chain ring and crank arm. That way it's easy to run it 
 as 
 a wide double (48/28 for example) with 110/74 or any choice of available 
 chain rings and still having a narrow Q-factor.

 It's too bad Grant seems to have given up on striving to keep the 
 Q-factor low. (?) As far as I can tell, you wouldn't lose anything with 
 such a crank, there would only be advantages. If you'd need a wider 
 ring-crank arm gap for some mtb style bike with wide tires and a wide 
 cage 
 front shifter you can add spacers and run it with three rings. Or one. Or 
 four. If you have an old road bike you can keep it lean and narrow and 
 run 
 it as a double with almost an unlimited choice of chain ring combinations 
 and a Q-factor in the 130 mm range, still using standard chain rings. 
 This 
 winter I'm hoping to be able to make such a crank for myself, since I 
 finally have access to a lathe and having collected many old cranks I can 
 modify and take parts from.

 Johan Larsson,
 Sweden

 -- 

  -- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
 RBW Owners Bunch group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
 email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com javascript:.
 To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com 
 javascript:.
 Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.




-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery]

It's difficult to have a narrow Q-factor and still have big tires and good 
shifting and a wide range of gears. Personally, I like the direction things 
are going with the wide range 1x10 and 1x11 stuff. Single chainring 
eliminates all these pesky front derailleur compatibility and functionality 
issues, and most chain suck issues. Rear derailleurs simply work more 
reliably than front derailleurs, and 11-42 cassettes with a carefully 
selected chainring size will get most of us up most of the grades that we 
ride. For example, for a hypothetical 700 mm wheel diameter, and a 36t 
chainring, you get a range of 24-90 gear inches. I can sacrifice higher and 
lower gears to not have front derailleur problems anymore.

On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 9:31:01 AM UTC-5, ted wrote:

 and whats the confidence interval ...

 On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 6:54:30 AM UTC-7, Peter M wrote:

 But that's only true 75% of the time... :)

 On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Tim Gavin tim@littlevillagemag.com 
 wrote:

 Johan-

 I rode a super low-Q Stronglight 99 triple on my Riv Road for several 
 months.  It's a very lovely, very narrow crank set.  I got it (from a list 
 member) with standard extractor and pedal threading.

 However, these old French cranks have very little distance between the 
 big ring and the crank arm (that's how they have such low Q factor), which 
 makes them difficult to shift properly.  I couldn't use any modern FD with 
 a sculpted outer plate or it would hit the crank arm.  I had decent luck 
 with a vintage Suntour Cyclone double FD, shifted friction with Silver 
 levers.  But with that setup it was still very reluctant to shift from the 
 small cog to the middle without going to the big ring first.  

 A triple FD would have a sculpted inner plate to lift the chain better 
 than the double FD, but I couldn't find any triple FDs, vintage or 
 otherwise, that don't also have a scuplted outer plate.

 I recently swapped my Riv to drop bars and index shifting (8 speed Campy 
 Ergos) and I couldn't get any FD to work with that Stronglight crank.  I 
 ended up swapping the Campy Racing Triple crank back on, which shifts 
 perfectly with the IRD Alpina FD.  

 I'm just pointing out that low-Q cranks with little space between the 
 big ring and the crank arm do have some complications.  Whether those 
 complications become drawbacks depends on your priorities.  :)

 With drops and Ergo shifters, my Riv is at least 17% faster.

 And 47% of all statistics are fictional.  :)



 On Sep 23, 2014 7:20 PM, Johan Larsson seven@gmail.com wrote:

 If I were to design a crankset I'd make it with chain ring bolts only 
 from the inside, like old SunTour XCM cranks but with a quite narrow gap 
 between the outer chain ring and crank arm. That way it's easy to run it 
 as 
 a wide double (48/28 for example) with 110/74 or any choice of available 
 chain rings and still having a narrow Q-factor.

 It's too bad Grant seems to have given up on striving to keep the 
 Q-factor low. (?) As far as I can tell, you wouldn't lose anything with 
 such a crank, there would only be advantages. If you'd need a wider 
 ring-crank arm gap for some mtb style bike with wide tires and a wide 
 cage 
 front shifter you can add spacers and run it with three rings. Or one. 
 Or 
 four. If you have an old road bike you can keep it lean and narrow and 
 run 
 it as a double with almost an unlimited choice of chain ring 
 combinations 
 and a Q-factor in the 130 mm range, still using standard chain rings. 
 This 
 winter I'm hoping to be able to make such a crank for myself, since I 
 finally have access to a lathe and having collected many old cranks I 
 can 
 modify and take parts from.

 Johan Larsson,
 Sweden

 -- 

  -- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
 Groups RBW Owners Bunch group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
 an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
 To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
 Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.




-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Steve Palincsar]

On 09/24/2014 01:36 PM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote:
It's difficult to have a narrow Q-factor and still have big tires and 
good shifting and a wide range of gears. 


A friend of mine has a Jeff Lyon L'Avecaise equipped with 650Bx42 Hetres 
and a Rene Herse crank.  Big tires, good shifting and wide range, and 
low Q.  It can definitely be done.





--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[EGNolan]

Jim said difficult, not impossible. I personally like 1x's as well, though 
I haven't made it over 7 in the rear yet...
 
Best,
Eric
Indpls
 

On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 2:24:53 PM UTC-4, Steve Palincsar wrote:

 On 09/24/2014 01:36 PM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote: 
  It's difficult to have a narrow Q-factor and still have big tires and 
  good shifting and a wide range of gears. 

 A friend of mine has a Jeff Lyon L'Avecaise equipped with 650Bx42 Hetres 
 and a Rene Herse crank.  Big tires, good shifting and wide range, and 
 low Q.  It can definitely be done. 






-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery]

I lot of us don't consider 42 mm tires to be especially large.

On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 1:24:53 PM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote:

 On 09/24/2014 01:36 PM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote: 
  It's difficult to have a narrow Q-factor and still have big tires and 
  good shifting and a wide range of gears. 

 A friend of mine has a Jeff Lyon L'Avecaise equipped with 650Bx42 Hetres 
 and a Rene Herse crank.  Big tires, good shifting and wide range, and 
 low Q.  It can definitely be done. 






-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Bill Lindsay]

Big tires are in the eye of the beholder.  28mm for some.  75mm for others
Narrow Q is in the eye of the beholder.  130mm for some.  165mm for others
Good shifting is in the eye of the beholder.  Doesn't chain suck for some. 
 Doesn't make a sound for others
Wide range gearing is in the eye of the beholder.  50-95 inches on a double 
for some.  18-110 inches on a triple for others
Difficult is in the eye of the beholder.  Can be done by a top builder 
for some.  Is done by mass producers for others

On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 1:19:22 PM UTC-7, Jim Thill - Hiawatha 
Cyclery wrote:

 I lot of us don't consider 42 mm tires to be especially large.

 On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 1:24:53 PM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote:

 On 09/24/2014 01:36 PM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote: 
  It's difficult to have a narrow Q-factor and still have big tires and 
  good shifting and a wide range of gears. 

 A friend of mine has a Jeff Lyon L'Avecaise equipped with 650Bx42 Hetres 
 and a Rene Herse crank.  Big tires, good shifting and wide range, and 
 low Q.  It can definitely be done. 






-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Garth]

LoL ...   Yes Bill !   
The I of the beholder indeed ! 

The best bike ever, and the best parts ever .  . . .are Ones I HAVE !


On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 4:28:45 PM UTC-4, Bill Lindsay wrote:

 *Big tires are in the eye of the beholder.  28mm for some.  75mm for 
 others*
 *Narrow Q is in the eye of the beholder.  130mm for some.  165mm for 
 others*
 *Good shifting is in the eye of the beholder.  Doesn't chain suck for 
 some.  Doesn't make a sound for others*
 *Wide range gearing is in the eye of the beholder.  50-95 inches on a 
 double for some.  18-110 inches on a triple for others*
 *Difficult is in the eye of the beholder.  Can be done by a top builder 
 for some.  Is done by mass producers for others*

 On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 1:19:22 PM UTC-7, Jim Thill - Hiawatha 
 Cyclery wrote:

 I lot of us don't consider 42 mm tires to be especially large.

 On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 1:24:53 PM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote:

 On 09/24/2014 01:36 PM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote: 
  It's difficult to have a narrow Q-factor and still have big tires and 
  good shifting and a wide range of gears. 

 A friend of mine has a Jeff Lyon L'Avecaise equipped with 650Bx42 Hetres 
 and a Rene Herse crank.  Big tires, good shifting and wide range, and 
 low Q.  It can definitely be done. 






-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Steve Palincsar]

On 09/24/2014 04:19 PM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote:

I lot of us don't consider 42 mm tires to be especially large.


Once you start getting beyond the demi-ballon size you're right, it 
becomes very difficult to maintain reasonable Q factors and all the rest.





On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 1:24:53 PM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote:

On 09/24/2014 01:36 PM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote:
 It's difficult to have a narrow Q-factor and still have big
tires and
 good shifting and a wide range of gears.

A friend of mine has a Jeff Lyon L'Avecaise equipped with 650Bx42
Hetres
and a Rene Herse crank.  Big tires, good shifting and wide range, and
low Q.  It can definitely be done.




--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Jim Bronson]

This post is addressed to nobody in particular, so don't take it
personal.  Instead, it's addressed towards group think that tends to
overtake any skepticism that might naturally occur towards new trends.

In many ways I am adherent to the old-school ways of doing things, but
if there's one area I really regret pursuing it's low-Q.  IT'S NOT FOR
EVERYONE AND IT'S NOT A PANACEA.

The hype about narrow Q-factor cost me a lot of cartilage in my knees.

Oh how many nights I laid in bed with throbbing knees.  If only I had
not listened.  What I really needed to do was go the opposite
direction.  I'm glad I finally came to realize that.  Otherwise, I
might not be riding at all, because it hurt so much.

Just think about it, next time you are bloviating about Q-factor.

Jim
The hype about narrow Q-factor cost me a lot of cartilage in my knees.

On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery
thill@gmail.com wrote:
 It's difficult to have a narrow Q-factor and still have big tires and good
 shifting and a wide range of gears. Personally, I like the direction things
 are going with the wide range 1x10 and 1x11 stuff. Single chainring
 eliminates all these pesky front derailleur compatibility and functionality
 issues, and most chain suck issues. Rear derailleurs simply work more
 reliably than front derailleurs, and 11-42 cassettes with a carefully
 selected chainring size will get most of us up most of the grades that we
 ride. For example, for a hypothetical 700 mm wheel diameter, and a 36t
 chainring, you get a range of 24-90 gear inches. I can sacrifice higher and
 lower gears to not have front derailleur problems anymore.


 On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 9:31:01 AM UTC-5, ted wrote:

 and whats the confidence interval ...

 On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 6:54:30 AM UTC-7, Peter M wrote:

 But that's only true 75% of the time... :)

 On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Tim Gavin tim@littlevillagemag.com
 wrote:

 Johan-

 I rode a super low-Q Stronglight 99 triple on my Riv Road for several
 months.  It's a very lovely, very narrow crank set.  I got it (from a list
 member) with standard extractor and pedal threading.

 However, these old French cranks have very little distance between the
 big ring and the crank arm (that's how they have such low Q factor), which
 makes them difficult to shift properly.  I couldn't use any modern FD with 
 a
 sculpted outer plate or it would hit the crank arm.  I had decent luck with
 a vintage Suntour Cyclone double FD, shifted friction with Silver levers.
 But with that setup it was still very reluctant to shift from the small cog
 to the middle without going to the big ring first.

 A triple FD would have a sculpted inner plate to lift the chain better
 than the double FD, but I couldn't find any triple FDs, vintage or
 otherwise, that don't also have a scuplted outer plate.

 I recently swapped my Riv to drop bars and index shifting (8 speed Campy
 Ergos) and I couldn't get any FD to work with that Stronglight crank.  I
 ended up swapping the Campy Racing Triple crank back on, which shifts
 perfectly with the IRD Alpina FD.

 I'm just pointing out that low-Q cranks with little space between the
 big ring and the crank arm do have some complications.  Whether those
 complications become drawbacks depends on your priorities.  :)

 With drops and Ergo shifters, my Riv is at least 17% faster.

 And 47% of all statistics are fictional.  :)



 On Sep 23, 2014 7:20 PM, Johan Larsson seven@gmail.com wrote:

 If I were to design a crankset I'd make it with chain ring bolts only
 from the inside, like old SunTour XCM cranks but with a quite narrow gap
 between the outer chain ring and crank arm. That way it's easy to run 
 it as
 a wide double (48/28 for example) with 110/74 or any choice of available
 chain rings and still having a narrow Q-factor.

 It's too bad Grant seems to have given up on striving to keep the
 Q-factor low. (?) As far as I can tell, you wouldn't lose anything with 
 such
 a crank, there would only be advantages. If you'd need a wider 
 ring-crank
 arm gap for some mtb style bike with wide tires and a wide cage front
 shifter you can add spacers and run it with three rings. Or one. Or 
 four. If
 you have an old road bike you can keep it lean and narrow and run it as 
 a
 double with almost an unlimited choice of chain ring combinations and a
 Q-factor in the 130 mm range, still using standard chain rings. This 
 winter
 I'm hoping to be able to make such a crank for myself, since I finally 
 have
 access to a lathe and having collected many old cranks I can modify and 
 take
 parts from.

 Johan Larsson,
 Sweden

 --

 --
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
 Groups RBW Owners Bunch group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
 an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
 To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
 Visit this group at 

Re: [RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Garth]

Very Good Jim ! 

Yes .  . . I bought that theory too  . . .  and it's all preference .  It 
used to be that every crank was narrow and straight, I can't say that I 
particularly liked it either .  Even my '83 Stumpy back in the day had a 
narrow straight Sugino triple .  I like the way the XD's feel now :)  
Speaking of design, those stays clearly chowed how a narrow cranks can be 
in unison with wide tires .  Plus, you could use about any rings and any 
crank with it .   Brilliant ! 



 *Baseball is ninety percent mental and the other half is physical. 
 http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/y/yogiberra162048.html *
 *Yogi Berra 
 http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/y/yogiberra162048.html*

 So is cycling . .  .  . . 




On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 5:04:24 PM UTC-4, Jim Bronson wrote:

 This post is addressed to nobody in particular, so don't take it 
 personal.  I
 Baseball is ninety percent mental and the other half is physical. 
 http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/y/yogiberra162048.html
 Yogi Berra 
 http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/y/yogiberra162048.html

 Read more at 
 http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/y/yogi_berra.html#S67Mo4PVRLlR5O8Z.99
 nstead, it's addressed towards group think that tends to 
 overtake any skepticism that might naturally occur towards new trends. 

 In many ways I am adherent to the old-school ways of doing things, but 
 if there's one area I really regret pursuing it's low-Q.  IT'S NOT FOR 
 EVERYONE AND IT'S NOT A PANACEA. 

 The hype about narrow Q-factor cost me a lot of cartilage in my knees. 

 Oh how many nights I laid in bed with throbbing knees.  If only I had 
 not listened.  What I really needed to do was go the opposite 
 direction.  I'm glad I finally came to realize that.  Otherwise, I 
 might not be riding at all, because it hurt so much. 

 Just think about it, next time you are bloviating about Q-factor. 

 Jim 
 The hype about narrow Q-factor cost me a lot of cartilage in my knees. 

 On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery 
 thil...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: 
  It's difficult to have a narrow Q-factor and still have big tires and 
 good 
  shifting and a wide range of gears. Personally, I like the direction 
 things 
  are going with the wide range 1x10 and 1x11 stuff. Single chainring 
  eliminates all these pesky front derailleur compatibility and 
 functionality 
  issues, and most chain suck issues. Rear derailleurs simply work more 
  reliably than front derailleurs, and 11-42 cassettes with a carefully 
  selected chainring size will get most of us up most of the grades that 
 we 
  ride. For example, for a hypothetical 700 mm wheel diameter, and a 36t 
  chainring, you get a range of 24-90 gear inches. I can sacrifice higher 
 and 
  lower gears to not have front derailleur problems anymore. 
  
  
  On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 9:31:01 AM UTC-5, ted wrote: 
  
  and whats the confidence interval ... 
  
  On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 6:54:30 AM UTC-7, Peter M wrote: 
  
  But that's only true 75% of the time... :) 
  
  On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Tim Gavin 
 tim@littlevillagemag.com 
  wrote: 
  
  Johan- 
  
  I rode a super low-Q Stronglight 99 triple on my Riv Road for several 
  months.  It's a very lovely, very narrow crank set.  I got it (from a 
 list 
  member) with standard extractor and pedal threading. 
  
  However, these old French cranks have very little distance between 
 the 
  big ring and the crank arm (that's how they have such low Q factor), 
 which 
  makes them difficult to shift properly.  I couldn't use any modern FD 
 with a 
  sculpted outer plate or it would hit the crank arm.  I had decent 
 luck with 
  a vintage Suntour Cyclone double FD, shifted friction with Silver 
 levers. 
  But with that setup it was still very reluctant to shift from the 
 small cog 
  to the middle without going to the big ring first. 
  
  A triple FD would have a sculpted inner plate to lift the chain 
 better 
  than the double FD, but I couldn't find any triple FDs, vintage or 
  otherwise, that don't also have a scuplted outer plate. 
  
  I recently swapped my Riv to drop bars and index shifting (8 speed 
 Campy 
  Ergos) and I couldn't get any FD to work with that Stronglight crank. 
  I 
  ended up swapping the Campy Racing Triple crank back on, which shifts 
  perfectly with the IRD Alpina FD. 
  
  I'm just pointing out that low-Q cranks with little space between the 
  big ring and the crank arm do have some complications.  Whether those 
  complications become drawbacks depends on your priorities.  :) 
  
  With drops and Ergo shifters, my Riv is at least 17% faster. 
  
  And 47% of all statistics are fictional.  :) 
  
  
  
  On Sep 23, 2014 7:20 PM, Johan Larsson seven@gmail.com 
 wrote: 
  
  If I were to design a crankset I'd make it with chain ring bolts 
 only 
  from the inside, like old SunTour XCM cranks but with a quite 
 narrow gap 
 

[RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Garth]

 I do believe it was 4-5 years ago that their own crank was coming . .  . . 
.  lol !  

It'll be a 110/74 BCD crank though , it's simply the most versatile overall 
.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Shoji Takahashi]

A prototype is on the 50cm Cheviot Complete:
http://www.rivbike.com/product-p/wsf106.htm

It's 5-bolt (non-hidden bolt), looks 110/74 to me, which would go with 
S!LVER rings. Finish is certainly not final with the prototype. 

shoji



On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 9:24:11 AM UTC-4, Garth wrote:


  I do believe it was 4-5 years ago that their own crank was coming . .  . 
 . .  lol !  

 It'll be a 110/74 BCD crank though , it's simply the most versatile 
 overall .


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Cyclofiend Jim]

I was still holding out hope for a steel crankset.  But, 94BCD with no 
hidden bolts would be fine.  

- Jim / cyclofiend.com

Set the wayback machine to 2009...

http://ramblings.cyclofiend.com/?p=399


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Brewster Fong]

On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 6:34:19 AM UTC-7, Shoji Takahashi wrote:

 A prototype is on the 50cm Cheviot Complete:
 http://www.rivbike.com/product-p/wsf106.htm

 
Thanks! If you read the description it states: The crankset (40/26)  hubs 
are really good S!lver prototype stuff which you may or may not be seeing 
on a future project we may or may not do.
 
I don't know who uses a 40/26 - seems awfully small - but if the rings are 
that small, it probablyis one  of those 110bcd for the big ring and a 
smaller 74mm bcd for the inner. I would have thought that since Grant likes 
triples, he would be offering a 110/74 triple?!  Good Luck! 

 It's 5-bolt (non-hidden bolt), looks 110/74 to me, which would go with 
 S!LVER rings. Finish is certainly not final with the prototype. 

 shoji



 On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 9:24:11 AM UTC-4, Garth wrote:


  I do believe it was 4-5 years ago that their own crank was coming . .  . 
 . .  lol !  

 It'll be a 110/74 BCD crank though , it's simply the most versatile 
 overall .



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Tim Gavin]

It looks like it is a triple, with a bash guard in place of the big ring.
Riv has been advocating Sugino XD's set up that way.

My impression of the Silver crank is it's roughly equivalent to a nice
Sugino, but with all bolts accessible.  Nice, practical, but not
revolutionary.  Probably exactly how Grant wants it.

Personally, I'm sorely tempted by the gorgeous Rene Herse triples from
Boulder--but not by the price!  :)

I tried to make a lovely Stronglight 99 triple work, but the crank arm is
so close to the big chain ring that it's very tough to get a derailer to
work without the outer plate hitting the crank arm.  Very low Q, however.

So, for now the Campy Racing Triple crank set is back on (and shifting
perfectly).  The Sugino XD's are ok, but they look plain and MTB-ish to
me.  Nothing wrong with MTB parts on a road bike, but I prefer the
retro-touring look on my Riv.

I may try the IRD defiant triple when my Campy rings are shot.  The IRD
looks like a prettier alternative to the Sugino that's still relatively
inexpensive.

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:08 AM, Brewster Fong bfd...@gmail.com wrote:


 On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 6:34:19 AM UTC-7, Shoji Takahashi wrote:

 A prototype is on the 50cm Cheviot Complete:
 http://www.rivbike.com/product-p/wsf106.htm


 Thanks! If you read the description it states: The crankset (40/26) 
 hubs are really good S!lver prototype stuff which you may or may not be
 seeing on a future project we may or may not do.

 I don't know who uses a 40/26 - seems awfully small - but if the rings are
 that small, it probablyis one  of those 110bcd for the big ring and a
 smaller 74mm bcd for the inner. I would have thought that since Grant likes
 triples, he would be offering a 110/74 triple?!  Good Luck!

 It's 5-bolt (non-hidden bolt), looks 110/74 to me, which would go with
 S!LVER rings. Finish is certainly not final with the prototype.

 shoji



 On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 9:24:11 AM UTC-4, Garth wrote:


  I do believe it was 4-5 years ago that their own crank was coming . .
 . . .  lol !

 It'll be a 110/74 BCD crank though , it's simply the most versatile
 overall .

  --
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
 RBW Owners Bunch group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
 email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
 To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
 Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Johan Larsson]

Forgot to add a picture of an old XCM crank...

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Johan Larsson]

If I were to design a crankset I'd make it with chain ring bolts only from 
the inside, like old SunTour XCM cranks but with a quite narrow gap between 
the outer chain ring and crank arm. That way it's easy to run it as a wide 
double (48/28 for example) with 110/74 or any choice of available chain 
rings and still having a narrow Q-factor.

It's too bad Grant seems to have given up on striving to keep the Q-factor 
low. (?) As far as I can tell, you wouldn't lose anything with such a 
crank, there would only be advantages. If you'd need a wider ring-crank arm 
gap for some mtb style bike with wide tires and a wide cage front shifter 
you can add spacers and run it with three rings. Or one. Or four. If you 
have an old road bike you can keep it lean and narrow and run it as a 
double with almost an unlimited choice of chain ring combinations and a 
Q-factor in the 130 mm range, still using standard chain rings. This winter 
I'm hoping to be able to make such a crank for myself, since I finally have 
access to a lathe and having collected many old cranks I can modify and 
take parts from.

Johan Larsson,
Sweden

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[Goshen Peter]

I thought since some of the Rivendell models have bowed chainstays you
could only have so low of a q factor. Or I might be totally wrong too.
On Sep 23, 2014 7:20 PM, Johan Larsson seven.nau...@gmail.com wrote:

 If I were to design a crankset I'd make it with chain ring bolts only from
 the inside, like old SunTour XCM cranks but with a quite narrow gap between
 the outer chain ring and crank arm. That way it's easy to run it as a wide
 double (48/28 for example) with 110/74 or any choice of available chain
 rings and still having a narrow Q-factor.

 It's too bad Grant seems to have given up on striving to keep the Q-factor
 low. (?) As far as I can tell, you wouldn't lose anything with such a
 crank, there would only be advantages. If you'd need a wider ring-crank arm
 gap for some mtb style bike with wide tires and a wide cage front shifter
 you can add spacers and run it with three rings. Or one. Or four. If you
 have an old road bike you can keep it lean and narrow and run it as a
 double with almost an unlimited choice of chain ring combinations and a
 Q-factor in the 130 mm range, still using standard chain rings. This winter
 I'm hoping to be able to make such a crank for myself, since I finally have
 access to a lathe and having collected many old cranks I can modify and
 take parts from.

 Johan Larsson,
 Sweden

 --
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
 RBW Owners Bunch group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
 email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
 To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
 Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: SILVER crankset!!!!

[ted]

Many factors come into play. At the moment I have a sugino crankset from 
RBW with 24/33/43 rings on it mounted on my Bombadil with a 107mm cartridge 
bb. Its close but despite the curves everything clears the chainstay. Mind 
you a 26 small ring would not clear with that bb, so ...

On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 5:04:10 PM UTC-7, Peter M wrote:

 I thought since some of the Rivendell models have bowed chainstays you 
 could only have so low of a q factor. Or I might be totally wrong too. 
 On Sep 23, 2014 7:20 PM, Johan Larsson seven@gmail.com 
 javascript: wrote:

 If I were to design a crankset I'd make it with chain ring bolts only 
 from the inside, like old SunTour XCM cranks but with a quite narrow gap 
 between the outer chain ring and crank arm. That way it's easy to run it as 
 a wide double (48/28 for example) with 110/74 or any choice of available 
 chain rings and still having a narrow Q-factor.

 It's too bad Grant seems to have given up on striving to keep the 
 Q-factor low. (?) As far as I can tell, you wouldn't lose anything with 
 such a crank, there would only be advantages. If you'd need a wider 
 ring-crank arm gap for some mtb style bike with wide tires and a wide cage 
 front shifter you can add spacers and run it with three rings. Or one. Or 
 four. If you have an old road bike you can keep it lean and narrow and run 
 it as a double with almost an unlimited choice of chain ring combinations 
 and a Q-factor in the 130 mm range, still using standard chain rings. This 
 winter I'm hoping to be able to make such a crank for myself, since I 
 finally have access to a lathe and having collected many old cranks I can 
 modify and take parts from.

 Johan Larsson,
 Sweden

 -- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
 RBW Owners Bunch group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
 email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com javascript:.
 To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com 
 javascript:.
 Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups RBW 
Owners Bunch group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.